Testing and integrating systems that communicate with one another is a difficult and expensive task. It is particularly difficult when multiple communication flows must be addressed simultaneously. Often integrators improvise tools on an “ad hoc” basis or create tools from scratch to monitor the communications between each interface. Oftentimes these project specific tools require instrumentation of the actual software under test to achieve access. These alterations can impact the base software in ways not intended by the initial creators. Test-unique code is undesirable from a philosophical, operational and cost efficiency standpoint.
Philosophically, modifying the unit under test to enable the test introduces ambiguities into the equation and can reduce overall process control. If a problem is seen, is it a result of an actual design or implementation flaw or is it an artifact of the test modifications? After testing is complete, is the test instrumentation to be removed from the system? How is it then verified that what is now running is equivalent to what was tested? Even if all the testing was successful, how can it be verified that the system wasn't broken when the test code was removed? Operationally, the testing and integration of these interfaces is often accomplished under considerable budgetary and schedule pressure. Integrators must develop custom tools for each interface and, due to budget and schedule pressure, these tools are often minimal in functionality. They amount to ad hoc utilities written to test specific items written on the fly by the test engineers themselves. Alternatively, the program may have budget for a “tools” group that will develop more extensive tools, at high cost, but these tools rarely provide any reusability beyond the specific interfaces being tested.
There is a need in the art for a reusable message traffic intercept tool that enables rapid deployment and high functionality.
There is another need in the art for a message traffic intercept tool that is portable and nonproprietary across different interfaces and protocols.
There is another need in the art for a message traffic intercept tool that enables testing, analyzing and simulating of message communications without tampering with the source code of the applications under examination.
There is another need in the art for a message traffic intercept tool that enables interfaces using different protocols to communicate with each other.
There is another need in the art for re-usable data reduction and analysis tools that allow the interpretation, display, manipulation, and production of reports from recorded data regardless of origin.